From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com (bear.ext.ti.com [192.94.94.41]) by yocto-www.yoctoproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 660D7E003E1 for ; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 14:22:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from dlep26.itg.ti.com ([157.170.170.121]) by bear.ext.ti.com (8.13.7/8.13.7) with ESMTP id q22MMVcv009652; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:22:31 -0600 Received: from DFLE71.ent.ti.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dlep26.itg.ti.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q22MMVjW022417; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:22:31 -0600 (CST) Received: from dlelxv22.itg.ti.com (172.17.1.197) by dfle71.ent.ti.com (128.247.5.62) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.1.323.3; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:22:31 -0600 Received: from gtwmills.gt.design.ti.com (gtwmills.gt.design.ti.com [158.218.100.52]) by dlelxv22.itg.ti.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q22MMUw8018070; Fri, 2 Mar 2012 16:22:30 -0600 Message-ID: <4F514826.5050402@ti.com> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 17:22:30 -0500 From: William Mills User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110617 Thunderbird/3.1.11 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Robert P. J. Day" References: <4F4D457F.7000306@windriver.com> In-Reply-To: Cc: Yocto discussion list , Koen Kooi Subject: Re: proper recipe for building for beagle xM? meta-ti? X-BeenThere: yocto@yoctoproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of all things Yocto List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2012 22:22:35 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 02/28/2012 05:28 PM, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Koen Kooi wrote: > >> Op 28 feb. 2012, om 22:55 heeft Robert P. J. Day het volgende geschreven: >> >>> On Tue, 28 Feb 2012, Bruce Ashfield wrote: >>> >>>> It is true that the beagleboard is a hardware reference board in the >>>> yocto consolidated kernel tree and meta-yocto layers. That means >>>> that it gets the yocto standard QA builds and boot testing. >>>> >>>> That being said, if you are looking for the latest + specific >>>> features then you've been pointed in a good direction .. meta-ti >>>> will meet your needs. >>>> >>>> As for disentangling and reducing questions in this area .. rest >>>> assured, we are working on it. >>> ok, that's perfectly reasonable -- meta-yocto provides a generic, >>> well-tested product, while the meta-ti layer provides more >>> leading-edge content, correct? >> No, the amount of testing is not the difference, the amount of >> support for the board is. Meta-ti supports the camera interfaces, 3d >> engine, dsp, crypto engines, expansion boards, etc. Meta-yocto lacks >> all that for beagleboard. > i understand that reasonably well, and i'll make one more > observation, then i'll shut up. > > i cloned the meta-ti layer into my yocto clone, and here's the > majority of the meta-ti README: > > ===== start > > This layer depends on: > > URI: git://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core > branch: master > revision: HEAD > > URI: git://git.openembedded.org/meta-openembedded > branch: master > revision: HEAD > > URI: git://git.angstrom-distribution.org/meta-angstrom > branch: master > revision: HEAD > > Currently meta-ti only works with the Angstrom distribution and hence > requires the meta-angstrom layer. There are known issues when using > gcc-4.6 based toolchain from OpenEmbedded-Core, thus gcc-4.5 > toolchain, provided by meta-openembedded, is needed. It is planned to > fix these shortcomings in the near future and allow building the base > BSP part of meta-ti with different distributions and layer stacks, > such as: distro-less (only with OE-Core), with Yocto/Poky, with > Angstrom or Arago. > > Due to the above, it is now recommended to follow the instructions at > http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/building-angstrom > > This will set it up for the OpenEmbedded-core layout instead of the > old "Classic" OpenEmbedded-dev layout. You can optionally tweak > sources/layers.txt and conf/bblayers.conf to (de)select BSP layers. > > ===== end > > by the time i'm done reading that, i'm not sure whether i've been > told i can use yocto as long as i do the necessary prep first, or that > i should give up on yocto and just use angstrom directly. i'm fine > with either approach, but the README seems to just waffle *totally* on > which strategy to use. > > quite simply, that README seems to provide nothing but more > confusion than anything else. Congratulations you are the first beta tester for the new README.txt language :) (patched two days ago). Denys: I suggest change: "Due to the above, it is now recommended to follow the instructions at http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/building-angstrom" to: "When the other layer combinations are supported instructions will be supplied here. Until that time please see the Angstrom setup instructions below. *** Angstrom w/ meta-ti Layer Stack setup: *** Please follow the instructions at http://www.angstrom-distribution.org/building-angstrom" etc.